A recent report from WBFF FOX45 Baltimore, presented by investigative journalist Tessa Bentulan, has brought to light some intriguing details regarding executive vehicles in Maryland. The focus of the report is on a particular vehicle assigned to Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott, which has sparked significant interest due to its hefty price tag.
According to Bentulan, Mayor Scott is provided with a taxpayer-funded SUV valued at $163,495, making it the most expensive executive vehicle among Maryland’s top officials. This price significantly overshadows the next highest vehicle noted in her investigation.
The report delves deeper than mere shock at the cost, raising concerns about oversight, budget management, and whether the spending habits of executives align with the financial realities faced by residents.
When pressed by Bentulan for justification of the vehicle’s cost, Scott reacted defensively, claiming the station was “dragging this thing out” and “not including all the facts,” while failing to provide a direct answer to the pressing question.
Examining the $163,495 Price Tag and the Mayor’s Reaction
Bentulan identified the vehicle as a 2025 Jeep Grand Wagoneer, which, according to the records, cost taxpayers $163,495.
Throughout her report, she repeatedly posed a straightforward question: if this expenditure is public money, why is this vehicle so much pricier than others?
Scott did not provide a clear answer; instead, he criticized the station’s motives, stating, “We understand that your station has this severe right-wing effort underway,” before cutting off further questioning.
Bentulan’s findings indicated that Scott not only avoided justifying the cost but also dismissed the inquiry as “idiotic,” claiming that comparisons made were incomplete.
When pressed again, Scott labeled the focus on the vehicle as “ridiculous” and urged the station to “let it go.” Such responses can backfire in discussions about taxpayer spending, as they may come off as attempts to evade accountability rather than offering explanations.
The most notable aspect of Bentulan’s report was not just Scott’s visible frustration but the absence of a calm, detailed justification that the public typically expects from officials embroiled in spending controversies.
Comparing Costs: The Mayor, the Governor, and Other Officials
Bentulan pointed out that the SUV’s price far exceeds those of other executive vehicles, including those used by city and county leaders, as well as the state’s governor, Wes Moore.
In her analysis, she noted that Moore’s 2025 Chevrolet Suburban cost approximately $72,000, with about $10,000 allocated for security upgrades, totaling $82,141.
In contrast, Scott’s vehicle breaks down to around $98,000 for the SUV itself and nearly $65,000 in security enhancements.
This results in a staggering 99% price difference compared to Moore’s total—almost double—highlighting the disparity among executive vehicles in the state.
Bentulan’s research revealed that county executive vehicles typically range from $51,000 to $77,000, while the governor’s vehicle sits at approximately $82,000. In stark contrast, Scott’s vehicle stands alone at $163,000.
The issue isn’t about whether officials should have protective vehicles; rather, the significant gap raises questions about the standards in place and their consistent application.
Moreover, public trust can quickly erode when residents see a luxury price tag associated with official perks, especially during times of financial strain and budget constraints.
The Security Upgrade Justification and Fact-Checking
Scott’s primary defense centered around the assertion that the vehicle functions as a police vehicle equipped with additional police gear, suggesting that the cost is justified within that framework.
He further claimed the expenses were not “astronomical,” a statement that may sound convincing in theory but becomes harder to accept when the figure displayed is $163,495, especially when compared to the lower costs of his peers.
Bentulan noted that the price is largely driven by the upgrades—nearly $65,000 in security modifications—prompting many to question not just the vehicle’s price but the specifics of what those upgrades entail and their justification.
Scott also mentioned that base SUV prices range from $90,000 to $100,000.
Bentulan’s team fact-checked this claim and discovered that manufacturer prices start significantly lower, with the 2026 Jeep Grand Wagoneer MSRP beginning below $65,000, while the 2026 Chevrolet Suburban and 2026 Ford Expedition start around the low $60,000 range.
Scott countered by stating that prices for vehicles purchased earlier differ from those in 2025, insisting that comparisons must consider timing and inflation.
Bentulan’s report indicated that her team utilized 2025 vehicle records, which is why the sticker shock persisted even with narrowed comparisons.
This situation illustrates how both sides reference “context,” but the public often perceives context as a spotlight rather than a smokescreen. When leaders deflect questions, it raises suspicions about what they might be trying to conceal.
The Sole Other Six-Figure Executive Vehicle
Bentulan noted that among all the records examined, only one other executive vehicle surpasses $100,000, which also belongs to a Baltimore City official.
This vehicle belongs to Richard Worley, the police commissioner, who is assigned a 2024 Chevrolet Tahoe with approximately $28,000 in security upgrades, totaling around $108,242.
Bentulan emphasized that even Worley’s total is still about $55,000 less than the mayor’s Grand Wagoneer, which is significant as it challenges the notion that such expenses are standard for city officials with security requirements.
Her investigation revealed that her team spent months obtaining records, facing delays and confusion over which office held the documents, before finally gathering enough information to compare vehicles statewide.
This detail is crucial, as delays in record retrieval can render stories like this speculative until concrete evidence emerges. Once the data was available, the figures were difficult to dispute.
She also pointed out that Scott’s SUV remained the most expensive even when compared to leaders overseeing larger jurisdictions, greater security risks, and higher travel demands, prompting questions about why his risk profile is considered so exceptional.
Why This Issue Has Grown Beyond a Simple Vehicle Purchase
Bentulan’s report framed the SUV as more than mere gossip; it posed a serious question about public finance with significant implications for public trust, as executive vehicles embody the intersection of safety, convenience, and taxpayer sentiment.
Scott attempted to redirect the conversation towards media bias, suggesting it was “funny” that his office was under scrutiny while others were not, even referencing past leaders and implying selective attention.
While this argument may resonate, it overlooks a key point: if the records indicate this is the most expensive vehicle, it naturally becomes the center of attention.
Moreover, Scott’s comparison of the inquiry to the cost of “The Beast” only holds if the public accepts that the mayor’s vehicle should be exempt from scrutiny, a premise that Bentulan’s report fundamentally challenges.
When government officials spend public funds on what appears to be a luxury, the onus is on them to provide clear explanations. Silence often breeds negative narratives that are seldom flattering.
Additionally, Bentulan’s findings subtly highlight the inconsistencies in standards across government, where one office may approve lavish upgrades while another would not, even with similar security needs.
This story underscores how accountability often hinges on diligent record-keeping and persistence rather than rhetoric—someone requests information, delays occur, and eventually, the public gains access to data that cannot easily be dismissed.
Bentulan concluded her segment with a straightforward assertion supported by the documents reviewed: in Maryland’s lineup of executive vehicles, Brandon Scott’s SUV stands alone in its category, and the mayor’s on-camera refusal to justify the expense has only amplified that distinction.
